Moving to rural property. Going fiber, 1.6 miles of copper?

Hello,
I hope I've posted this in the right section.
We are considering moving to a rural property in Lincolnshire. It is on standard broadband at the moment but is planned to be upgraded to fiber this month. The problem is it appears to be 1.6 miles from the cabinet. As I understand it, that means even though fiber's going to the cabinet it will be traveling 1.6 miles over the old copper cable? I was wondering if someone could tell me how this will affect both speed and latency?
We are currently living in a town with fiber (Plusnet) and tend to average around 50Mbps (a speed test just now came up at 38.15 download and 15.88 upload with a ping of 26)
There are three of us and we are all pretty heavy users. My brother and I are both PC gamers and all three of us also do a lot of downloading and streaming (like Netflix etc). We also run a business from home and need to upload images quickly to websites and ebay.
As mentioned above, our concern is how having 1.6 miles of copper will affect the speed and latency? Before we got upgraded to fiber here we used to get kicked out of game servers for a high ping.

The people funding the upgrade are Onlincolnshire, though BT are carrying out the work. They have said if they can get enough people in the village to request it that they will put a terminal in the local villiage. As I understand it this is some device that goes in between the cabinet and the property to extend the fiber and reduce the length is has to travel by copper? If the speed will be too low/ping too high without it, will the terminal improve things?
Thanks

This link shows you the speed distance graph
http://www.increasebroadbandspeed.co.uk/2013/chart-b...

1.6 miles is nearly 2.6km

you are going to be down at around 10mb/s. Latency is going to be determined by line quality and how much interleaving is required. I don't think it is possible to predict.

10 Mbps might be optimistic, at that distance the variables are so wide it could be 1 Mbps or 10 Mbps.

I'd not put any hope on the 'new terminal' since not aware of this happening in Lincolnshire at all.

I would be harsh and say if you are heavy users and need broadband for business you need to consider somewhere else, and only places where the fibre is live and ready to order and thus you can get a proper speed estimate.

Why would anyone who needs fast internet even consider moving to somewhere that its not available yet? The promise of fibre being available is just that "a promise" until its actually up and running. I'd wait until its is available and see what sort of speeds it gives.
Unfortunately like it or not, fast internet is rewriting the value of property across the UK. Its quickly becoming as important as Gas, Electricity and Water. No one would consider a property where the electricity was only avaliable for 8 hours a day. There are some who are still in denial, but its a fact.
I wouldn't even consider a property that doesn't already have fibre in place with speeds of 40mb +.

As Mr Saffron suggests, until it is enabled at those kind of distances, until it is tested and enabled it is a guessing game as to what kind of speeds you will get, if any at all.

I have a similar situation for where I am moving to soon (in a month or so).

The exchange and cabinet are fibre enabled however there is around a ~2 mile distance from the village in question (Sproxton) to the cabinet which is in Helmsley. The usual websites suggest 4mbit is the best I can achieve, since FTTC is not available. FTTPoD is offered but i cannot justify paying for it. According to the openreach website they are exploring options for the cabinet in question, so again not good news short-term.

My solution is at the moment banking on the local fixed wireless provider (LN Comms - www.iloveboradband.co.uk) being able to provide a ~30mbit service as long as I am within range which needs to be verified by a quick site survey.....
...or.....
... biding my time until a solution appears either in the guise of improved connectivity via the BT route or something else coming along.

The fixed wireless option I am backing at the moment as it frees me of requiring a pair of wires coming in which I am tied to paying ~£16 a month for.

I would take a look in your area for something OTHER THAN the BT route if this is going to be giving you a below par service for the same price others pay for something above 40mbit. Looking at the online Lincolnshire website presented me with THIS. Might have some promise, also theres a good ammount of information on the phases of thier broadband rollout....is there anything to be found for the area you are looking at in terms of an upgrade to the system???

Just my opinion, there are other opinions available

Edited by mrvanx (Sun 07-Jun-15 15:40:46)

Hi..
Just wanted to check.. your saying FoD is available ?
That's news if it is as it was on hold, so has something changed ? Or is this something special.

You will be aware I hope that many villages in the UK do not have mains gas and have to rely on either oil tanks or propane cylinders for heating etc.

Im only going by the openreach address checker website.

I have no idea how accurate or up to date it is, maybe MrSaffron can comment??

I have posted the results of the checker HERE.

In reply to a post by mrvanx:

Im only going by the openreach address checker website.

I have no idea how accurate or up to date it is, maybe MrSaffron can comment??

I have posted the results of the checker HERE.

Interesting! I've never seen that on a line checker result.

I thought so!!

Though from what I gather we are talking atlest a few £K getting it installed, it might end up with the village full fibre enabled however.

If my rose tinted view is correct??? maybe the fibre can be multiplexed to a cabinet or something?? perhaps a CWDM/DWDM or similar technology.

My initial view still stands that the fixed wireless option is still a go-er. There could be options later on for someone to setup a repeater for the village or something, I have got an interest in championing something for the village as really 4mbit isnt great for this day and age.

Well, I wouldn't even consider those either. Having said that, having no Mains Gas supply doesn't stop you getting perfectly good heating/cooking via Electric, Oil or other alternatives. If there is no super fast broadband of any description then it's a dead loss. Your remark is completely pointless.

FTTP on Demand was never withdrawn from the checker - it continues to show across the availability footprint at the time of product suspension. However, any attempt to order FTTPoD at the moment will not be accepted.

In other words, FTTPoD still exists, but the ability to place new orders has been suspended indefinitely and the on Demand product may well be changed before becoming available again.


I think it is fairly obvious that FTTPoD will have to change in the light of Openreach's declared intention to deploy G.FAST, as well as the low interest in the original FTTP on Demand. It might be that Openreach will introduce G.FAST on Demand, where those in the footprint identified for G.FAST can either have G.FAST or FTTP on Demand, and Openreach get a contribution towards the deployment costs of their intended commercial G.FAST service in that area.

In reply to a post by mrvanx:

According to the openreach website they are exploring options for the cabinet in question, so again not good news short-term.

Exploring Options for these longer lines was understood as the possible ADSL2+ from the Cabinet offering that Openreach have talked about in the past. Unfortunately, this is not as simple as just putting some ADSL2+ line cards in the cabinets (or enabling ADSL2+ on the existing line cards if they are capable of it) - there are compatibility issues with high power ADSL2+ signals originating from the cabinet, which seems likely to impose a maximum downstream speed of 12Mbit/s. There are also potential regulatory issues from the arguably uneven playing field between what would be SLU ADSL2+ from Openreach and slower LLU ADSL2+ from their competitors.

Now that Openreach have declared their intention to deploy G.FAST, it might be that they use G.FAST to deal with many of the lines on an FTTC served cabinet that are too long for the VDSL2 Profile 17a used by the FTTC service to offer worthwhile service. This would be a better option that ADSL2+ from the Cabinet, but will not be economic for all the longer lines and may well be several years from being commercial reality.

Hopefully Openreach will pursue both ADSL2+ from the Cabinet (is that AFTC?) and G.FAST - though they may well favour G.FAST over deeper deployment of what is already legacy technology.

Hi, I suspect it could be location dependant as it was previously showing in some areas and is not longer showing on the by DSL checker for areas I was looking at.

I can't think of any regulatory issues. They will just use the current VULA system that they currently use for VDSL2 to give other providers access. I don't see why that part of it needs to be any different. They'd just be using ADSL2+ instead of VDSL2. The rest of the way FTTC works can stay the same surely?

As Mr S says - OPTIMISTIC.

I have one location where the line length is around 2.6km - it can be followed from house to cabinet. The current estimate from BT is 1.0 to 0.1 Mbps downstream ...

That chart is for a perfect line, no joints, minimal external noise, no cross talk &c.

The issue I was thinking of is that I'm not sure the current ANFP fully resolves the issues inherent in providing ADSL2+ at the PCP alongside active VDSL2, BT Wholesale ADSL, possible LLU ADSL and, in some cases, non-Openreach SLU. Clearly some power masking will be needed- which is why the downstream will be limited to 12Mbit/s - but is this fully worked through in the current ANFP? Even if it is, some increase in the noise floor at the Cabinet can't be helped when deploying AFTC, which could have a particularly detrimental effect on the longest VDSL2 lines.

There is the possibility within Openreach's regulatory framework to replace all LLU ADSL2+ with ADSL2+ from the Cabinet whenever AFTC is available, offering VULA instead, but will that happen in practice? Whilst AFTC will offer higher speeds for some, those on short lines might get higher speeds from exchange based ADSL2+ (which is not subject to such restrictive power masking), also anyone moved to AFTC would not have the tweaking potential offered by some LLU ADSL2+.


Rather than dealing with these issues, I'm wondering if Openreach's silence over ADSL2+ from the Cabinet indicates their preferred solution now is to focus on G.FAST. Compared to AFTC, G.FAST has the advantages that any noise floor impact will be local to the G.FAST node and any existing ADSL2+ or VDSL2 negatively affected by the G.FAST deployment should be possible to replace with an equivalent suited or faster service delivered over G.FAST.

Edited by deleted (Mon 08-Jun-15 13:30:04)

I many of the places where they are long lines, people may have been paying the higher Market1 rates just to get 1 to 2Mb, and those small exchanges may never been upgraded to WBC so ADSL2+ was not available from BT.

So to get AFTC, even in a mode where ADSL2+ has a download speed limited to 12Mb will be an amazing uplift in speed for many people.

There clearly have to further efforts to come up with non-exchange based solutions for those more distant from cabinets. AFTC could be a help, though, like any DSL based solution, it's not a simple case of better service for those who take it whilst everything else remain unaffected.

Openreach do not talk directly to the public about many of their plans. However, if the recent suggestions that Openreach are not going to pursue widespread VDSL2 vectoring are correct, it suggests that Openreach's strategy might be to move towards newer technology rather than pursue every possible upgrade of current generations.

In reply to a post by David_W:

However, if the recent suggestions that Openreach are not going to pursue widespread VDSL2 vectoring are correct, it suggests that Openreach's strategy might be to move towards newer technology rather than pursue every possible upgrade of current generations.

Which is understandable, but I fear for those who are connected by cables buried in the ground, they would have to replace 1km of buried cables with fibre over poles or install ducting, it looks like they may hold out for more BDUK funding before they do this though in the Phase3 which gets mentioned in some places. At least the AFTC option in theory works now on existing cables.

Ouch!

I am on 700m from the cabinet of copper wire and I get 44/12 mostly. Had a lot of issues with line noise causing packet loss / jitter though.

I think the references Openreach made to ADSL2+ from the cabinet were named "GEA over ADSL2+".

In reply to a post by David_W:

The issue I was thinking of is that I'm not sure the current ANFP fully resolves the issues inherent in providing ADSL2+ at the PCP alongside active VDSL2, BT Wholesale ADSL, possible LLU ADSL and, in some cases, non-Openreach SLU. Clearly some power masking will be needed

As far as I can make out, the ANFP restricts itself to exactly this - specifying the PSD masks - without limiting the technology. If the technology can't work with those masks, then it gets ruled out.

So long as ADSL2+ can work with those masks, then it should be fine. And I think it can.

There is the possibility within Openreach's regulatory framework to replace all LLU ADSL2+ with ADSL2+ from the Cabinet whenever AFTC is available, offering VULA instead, but will that happen in practice?

Does that possibility really exist? Perhaps BT can announce that (in 5 years) they will remove all copper from an exchange, but I suspect that is all they can do right now.

New Zealand have done things this way ... such that LLU operators are forced to give up exchange-based ADSL and have to swap to a VULA equivalent, when the NZ telco announces each cabinet has been upgraded. I *think* LLU operators also have a right to base equipment at the cabinets too.

Of course, NZ started this policy in order to deploy ADSL2+ from the cabinet before VDSL2 came along.

Whilst AFTC will offer higher speeds for some, those on short lines might get higher speeds from exchange based ADSL2+ (which is not subject to such restrictive power masking), also anyone moved to AFTC would not have the tweaking potential offered by some LLU ADSL2+.

When you think of the concept of the PSD masks, they exist to ensure that the transmit power at the cabinet matches exactly the power of the exchange-originated signal as it passes the cabinet. If either signal is higher than the other, it swamps the lower one.

If you follow that concept, you realise that this means the signal strength can be no different. And you reach the startling conclusion that ADSL2+ from the cabinet can be no better and no worse than ADSL2+ from the exchange.

Perhaps the reality of PSD masks doesn't quite match this utopian concept, so ADSL2+ from the cabinet works.

Without knowing more of the practical details, I find it hard to see beyond this conclusion ... and that might explain why Openreach have remained very silent.

To get around this, they would have to stop LLU from an exchange, and to swap all exchange-based customers onto their cabinet, and get ANFP approval to not apply PSD masks when there is no exchange-originated signal.

That might be a regulatory battle worth having if the results affected a significant proportion, or there was no "deeper node" solution like FTTRN or G.fast

Rather than dealing with these issues, I'm wondering if Openreach's silence over ADSL2+ from the Cabinet indicates their preferred solution now is to focus on G.FAST. Compared to AFTC, G.FAST has the advantages that any noise floor impact will be local to the G.FAST node and any existing ADSL2+ or VDSL2 negatively affected by the G.FAST deployment should be possible to replace with an equivalent suited or faster service delivered over G.FAST.

I tend to agree. G.fast has become, as BTW announced last week, "a game changer". It looks to have caused a lot of re-thinking to any access-network strategy that used to exist.

http://www.lightreading.com/gigabit/dsl-vectoring-gf...

This video pre-dates that story a little...
http://forums.thinkbroadband.com/fibre/t/4408830-re-...

In reply to a post by MHC:

As Mr S says - OPTIMISTIC.

I have one location where the line length is around 2.6km - it can be followed from house to cabinet. The current estimate from BT is 1.0 to 0.1 Mbps downstream ...

That chart is for a perfect line, no joints, minimal external noise, no cross talk &c.

I agree.

I think the graph is reasonable up to distances around 1km - 1.3km. However, beyond that region, the "long tail" could drop to zero anywhere from 2km onwards.

Fortunately, there are only 4% of lines beyond the 1.5km; too few properties to make sweeping statistical generalisations over.

I don't see G fast being much of a game changer unless BT are prepared to deploy other it than from a cabinet.

Our village is 1.5 to 2 miles from the cabinet. I have managed to get 1.8Mpbs on my office line (it was 2.2 on installation but has deteriorated since) but Openreach could not provide a service on the residential line which shares almost all the same copper on the way.